0
   

The 82nd Rainforest Thread ~

 
 
Stradee
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2008 11:17 am
@ehBeth,
ok Very Happy

0 Replies
 
Stradee
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2008 11:43 am
Quote:
The answer is to create a habitat that is sustaining to them.


Planting herbs and perennials attract butterflies.

A very cool article, plus at the bottom of the page, more info links.
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/arts/story.html?id=2a7b6686-806b-4c3f-913f-7c6863037ce6


ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2008 02:01 pm
The WildClickers have supported 2,911,006.7 square feet!

Marine Wetlands habitat supported: 215,142.7 square feet.

American Prairie habitat supported: 67,753.4 square feet.

Rainforest habitat supported: 2,628,110.5 square feet.

danon5
 
  2  
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2008 05:37 pm
@ehBeth,
66.827 acres of trees asmiling - - - Grinning.

Great going Wildclickers !!!

Also, Merry Andrew - it's been really great meeting and knowing you. Please feel free to visit any time. I'm still going to keep your clicks aclicking.

Alex, I guess it's now just you and me and the girls. Keep those clicks clicking.
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2008 05:44 pm
@danon5,
that reminds me, where's Amigo?

I haven't seen him since before the switchover

hmmmm

~~~~

I like the new avatar, Dan, though it's not the you I'm used to. Changes all round, eh.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  2  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 04:32 am
@Stradee,
Yes, a good article. Just about anything attractive to bees will be attractive to butterflies. But butterflies have decided preferences (varying by species) on upon what type of plant they wish to lay their eggs and make cocoons.
sumac
 
  2  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 04:35 am
@sumac,
You have to have sharp eyes around here. Some clickable options appear in one place only. Try to find them again on the next page you are one, and you won't. For instance, when I was originally replying to Stradee's post, I noticed out of the corner of my eye a link on the left that would have tagged the topic for me. I didn't, and now it is not there.

I also gather (ehBeth?) that email updates are to be a thing of the past?
teenyboone
 
  2  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 06:57 am
@danon5,
I love replying to you, too! How did you insert Emmett? All clicked!
danon5
 
  2  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 10:26 am
@teenyboone,
teeny, Emmett came the same way as your avatar - through gravatar. I just uploaded it and it became my avatar.

I had it laying around in my pictures folder.
Stradee
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 11:20 am
@sumac,
Right you are sue. Just find what species of butterfly indiginous to each persons state, then plant Very Happy

There's a wasp nest nestled under the eaves of the garage - not certain if they detract butterflies or honey bees though. Herb plantings slated for next spring - plus whatever else needed to attract butterflies. Finding places where the deer won't consume the lot. The two porch railings seem the best place to begin. Three Jasmine plants thriving on one of the porches - and two purple heart plants with an abundance of flowers { back porch}- so far the deer have kept their distance opting for a patch of clover and resting on the lawns. Hoping they don't begin climbing stairs {again}.

Beautiful summer day - low 8O's.

Perfect outdoor weather - catching up on yardwork. Good day all ~

http://rainforest.care2.com/i?p=583091674
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 04:18 pm
@sumac,
The WildClickers have supported 2,911,221.4 square feet!

Marine Wetlands habitat supported: 215,194.6 square feet.

American Prairie habitat supported: 67,753.4 square feet.

Rainforest habitat supported: 2,628,273.4 square feet.

~~~

sumac, I've read that pm's and email updates are features that will be returning. Craven and his developers have posted that they launched the site in a sort of no-frills way, with more improvements to come.


sumac
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Aug, 2008 04:30 am
@ehBeth,
I have noted the wonderful array of helpful new threads on the main page and will read them, and thank everyone.

Meanwhile, doing what comes naturally to me, and hopefully, you all partake: here are a couple of interesting articles.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/08/19/science/19angi1.190.jpg

August 19, 2008
Basics
Life Is Short...
By NATALIE ANGIER

Sure, Michael Phelps may have snapped a string of Olympic records like so many Rice Krispies in milk, but what was this child of Poseidon up against, anyway? Elite human athletes from 250 countries.

A small, speckled, asparagus-green chameleon of Madagascar, by contrast, holds a world speed record among just about all of the nearly 30,000 different animals equipped with four limbs and a backbone.

Admittedly, it’s not a record many of us would aspire to best. As researchers recently reported in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the entire life span of the Furcifer labordi chameleon " from the moment of conception to development in the egg, hatching, maturation, breeding and right through to its last little lizardly thud to the ground " clocks in at barely a year.

That hypercondensed biography, the scientists said, may well make the chameleon the shortest-lived tetrapod on Earth, a creature chronologically more like a butterfly or a sea squirt than like the other reptiles, frogs, birds and mammals with which it is taxonomically bundled.

Equally bizarre, said Christopher J. Raxworthy, an author of the new report, the chameleon spends some two-thirds of its abbreviated existence as an egg buried in sand, with a mere 16 to 20 weeks allocated to all post-shellular affairs.

Moreover, the chameleons operate by a synchronized schedule, hatching, growing, mating and dying at more or less the same times and at the same pace throughout the year. As a result, said Dr. Raxworthy, associate curator of herpetology at the American Museum of Natural History, “if you go into a forest during the dry season, the whole population of chameleons there will be represented by eggs.”

Counterintuitive though it may seem, the extremity of F. labordi’s schedule could prove valuable for tracking down genes and other biological factors that promote longevity. The researchers observed that the chameleon is not merely short-lived as a matter of averages. It is an obligate annual species, destined for death after a single spin around the sun, and that stated fate differs markedly from the varying degrees of perenniality found throughout the tetrapod clan.

“There are about a dozen lizard species known to be short-lived, in which a good proportion of individuals die off by a year,” said Kristopher B. Karsten of the zoology department at Oklahoma State University, another author of the report. “But there are always some that make it to the next year, so the species’ maximal longevity is greater than one year.”

No such luck for our bug-eyed Malagasy friends, which live in the arid, scrubby southwestern region of the giant island. “Once they reach the end of the season,” Dr. Karsten said, “they’re done,” and they will drop from the trees with the papery grace of autumn leaves.

Assuming the execution orders are somehow part of the chameleon’s program, researchers might be able to identify the specific genetic or hormonal assassins in lizard cells, find their analogues in human cells and put a cap in them.

The new work also underscores the growing use of so-called life history theory to trace the history and contours of life on Earth.

Scientists have determined that many essential features of an animal’s portfolio are linked, among them whether at birth it looks fetal and helpless like a newborn kitten or precocious and competent like a neonatal giraffe; how big the average litter is; the speed with which the animal reaches sexual maturity; the length of time between births; and the pace at which an adult ages.

Try to improve or optimize one of these parameters and you end up paying somewhere else along the line. “One of the most robust things to come out of life history theory is that trade-offs exist,” said Steven N. Austad, the author of “Why We Age” and a professor of cellular and structural biology at the University of Texas Health Science Center.

“If you increase the number of young, the cost is often accelerated aging. If you get something that lives longer, you get costs early in life, with lower fertility and even sterility.”

Selective pressures in the environment push species toward one life history course or another. One example is that if you’re a species in which the great majority of adults end up being killed by predators or disease, it’s best to invest your resources in breeding early and often and not to bother worrying about long-term needs like a robust DNA repair system. And so it is that rodents beloved by carnivores everywhere have high fecundity and relatively poor longevity.

If you’re a species in which infant and juvenile mortality is comparatively great, as it is with giant tortoises, for example, the emphasis is often on making the best of adulthood, with delayed maturity and extended life spans.

Catastrophic extrinsic changes may quickly rewrite a species’ game plan. In another new report from the National Academies journal, researchers presented evidence that Tasmanian devils, the largest of all carnivorous marsupials, have responded to an epidemic of fatal transmissible tumors among adults with a 16-fold increase in precocious puberty among the young. If you’re likely to be gone tomorrow, you’d better start begetting today.

Furcifer labordi’s extreme life history likewise seems born of extreme adversity and volatility. The chameleon is one of the smallest members of its genus, and adults are readily, avidly snacked on by birds and snakes. The local climate is harsh and unpredictable, lowering the odds of survival beyond a single rainy season.

In addition, the rainy season, which begins in November, when the chameleons hatch en masse, is brief and must be frantically exploited. The young coil-tongued lizards immediately start lassoing insects, and they eat so much, Dr. Raxworthy said, “that they practically grow in front of your very eyes.”

By January the chameleons are ready to mate, a nasty, often violent business of males fighting males, females fighting males, and all of them wishing they were somewhere else. Despite their cuteness, Dr. Raxworthy said, “chameleons can be very antisocial, and if you crowd them, they’ll happily fight to the death.”

Dr. Karsten suspects that Furcifer labordi’s compressed breeding season fosters such high levels of aggression that the chameleons die, in part, of hormone overdose.

Another athletic career cut tragically short by steroids.
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Aug, 2008 04:32 am
@sumac,
(now where did I put them?)
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Aug, 2008 04:34 am
@sumac,
August 19, 2008
Editorial
Whales, Dolphins, Sonar and the Courts

We were cheered to learn that the Navy and conservation groups have reached a court-approved settlement that allows the service ample opportunity to test its low-frequency sonar systems while protecting the habitats of marine life that can’t tolerate loud underwater sound. Sometimes compromise and good sense do prevail. So it is especially disturbing that the Bush administration is still trying to block the courts’ ability to mediate future agreements between the military and environmentalists.

The vigilantly anti-regulatory Bush administration told the Navy that it could test its sonar in more than 70 percent of the world’s ocean area. It claimed that training on the loud, low-frequency devices, which can detect submarines at great distances, was important to national security and that any environmental damage would be minimal. However, the same sound waves that can detect distant submarines can also bombard marine habitats, near and far, disrupting the activities of whales, dolphins and other acoustically sensitive creatures.

Fortunately, the Natural Resources Defense Council and other organizations sued to rein in the exercises, and a federal court in California issued injunctions and supplied the judicial muscle to force a mediated settlement. The agreement, approved this month, still allows the Navy to test its sonar in large areas in the Northwestern Pacific and around Hawaii while carving out segments that are critically important for marine life.

Both sides have expressed satisfaction with the result. That hasn’t stopped the administration’s efforts to sidestep the courts in a separate case on the use of midfrequency sonar off the coast of Southern California.

A federal district court and federal appeals court in California have ordered the Navy to adopt strong measures to protect marine life during the exercises. The administration has invoked national security to exempt the Navy from strict adherence to the environmental laws that undergirded the court decisions, thereby making the courts irrelevant.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on who gets the final say on this issue: the courts or the executive branch. We hope the justices slap down the administration’s efforts to thwart judicial oversight. This month’s settlement shows that military readiness and environmental protection are not incompatible and that the courts can play a constructive role in forging an acceptable compromise.
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Aug, 2008 04:38 am
@sumac,
The following should be required reading for anyone interested in the subject matter. All bases are touched.

Renewable Power's Growth in Colorado Presages National Debate

By Peter Slevin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, August 18, 2008; A01

DENVER -- When Colorado voters were deciding whether to require that 10 percent of the state's electricity come from renewable fuels, the state's largest utility fought the proposal, warning that any shift from coal and natural gas would be costly, uncertain and unwise.

Then a funny thing happened. The ballot initiative passed, and Xcel Energy met the requirement eight years ahead of schedule. And at the government's urging, its executives quickly agreed to double the target, to 20 percent.

In Colorado -- a state historically known for natural gas and fights over drilling -- wind and solar power are fast becoming prominent parts of the energy mix. Wind capacity has quadrupled in the past 18 months, according to Gov. Bill Ritter (D), and Xcel has become the largest provider of wind power in the nation.

The politics and economics of energy are shifting here in ways that foretell debates across the country as states create renewable-energy mandates and the federal government moves toward limiting carbon emissions. One advocate calls Colorado "ground zero" for the looming battle over energy.

Despite a continuing boom, oil and gas companies here are on the defensive. They are spending heavily as they try to prevent the repeal of as much as $300 million in annual tax breaks that would be shifted to investment in renewables and other projects.

The industry, already facing a rebellion among some longtime supporters angered by its toll on the environment, also finds itself in a fight against new regulations designed to protect wildlife and public health from the vast expansion in drilling. Beyond the merits, the proposals reflect the strengthened hand of environmentalists and their friends who feel that the fossil-fuel companies have held sway too long.

"Now is a terrific time for renewables to launch. I hope they get all the capital they need, and all the great minds and talent. But I don't want it to come at the expense of the oil and gas industry," said Meg Collins, president of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association. "As goes Colorado, so goes the West, as far as this energy policy debate."

State leaders are thrilled with the economic benefits that have come with the hundreds of new research and manufacturing jobs in pursuit of alternative power. Yet the fledgling renewables industry is also facing challenges, from a desire for tax credits of its own to a need for a stronger transmission grid that will make power more portable.

"The future in Colorado is building wind farms in wheat fields," said Ritter, a former Denver prosecutor, recalling the 2006 campaign pitch that helped carry him into the governor's office. "Quite frankly, it's how we should have been thinking for 10 years."

Ten years ago, Xcel began offering wind-generated electricity, but it was a niche market for eco-conscious customers willing to pay extra. That changed in a significant way after 2004, when Xcel lost the referendum fight.

After legislative efforts failed, proponents of renewable energy turned to the ballot that year. The initiative, Amendment 37, required the state's biggest utilities to generate 10 percent of their electricity from renewable sources. Advocates found themselves facing off against Xcel, which said it feared for its bottom line.

"We ended up opposing that amendment. In retrospect, I wish we hadn't," said Frank Prager, Xcel's vice president for environmental policy. He said utility companies are inherently conservative, yet find themselves facing a transformation in an industry that, as he put it, has changed little since Thomas Edison's time.

Voters rejected the utility industry's arguments and approved the measure, making Colorado the first state to mandate renewable-energy use at the ballot box. Today, legislatures in more than 25 states have set prescribed levels, known formally as "renewable portfolio standards."

"It was one of those cases where the public was ahead of the politicians," said Tom Plant, Ritter's top energy strategist.

Once Xcel executives began to come to terms with the new rules, they discovered that federal tax credits made wind power affordable, especially in relation to rising natural gas prices. The cost of wind power is relatively constant and provides a hedge against future emissions regulation, such as the cap-and-trade approach favored by presidential candidates Barack Obama (D) and John McCain (R).

"It was good for the system," Xcel's Prager said, referring to the utility's mix of energy sources, "and it was good for the customer."

By the end of 2007, Xcel had met Amendment 37's goal and endorsed Ritter's request to double it to 20 percent by 2020. That measure passed the Colorado legislature easily: With the utility on board and public sentiment clear, the bill collected 50 sponsors in the 65-member House.

Executives at publicly traded Xcel stress their twin desires to make money and to insulate the company from the risks of unproven technology. As Prager put it during an interview in the company's downtown Denver headquarters: "It's absolutely essential that the state offer us something that makes it worth our while to be green."

Amendment 37 allows utilities to collect a fee from customers to invest in renewable fuels; it averages $12.72 a year for a typical homeowner with a monthly bill of $73. When the renewables goal doubled last year, so did the fee. Prager said the fee has provided Xcel $37.6 million between March 2006 and July 2008 for capital investment in wind and solar.

Colorado is adding wind-power capacity at a higher rate than any other state, its hundreds of turbines delivering one gigawatt of generating power at the end of 2007. That is triple the total of 12 months earlier. Six states produce more than one gigawatt with wind, with Texas far in front and California second.

Solar power remains a small part of the equation in Colorado, in part because concentrated solar generation is expensive. Xcel is sponsoring an 80-acre field of photovoltaic panels in the San Luis Valley, a project expected to provide 8.2 megawatts of electricity, enough to power about 1,500 homes. But only 4 percent of Xcel's renewable megawattage is required to come from solar.

Meanwhile, Xcel's latest plan, filed with the Colorado Public Utilities Commission, calls for retiring two of its aging coal-fired power generators.

"We've reached this critical point where we're seeing the deployment of these technologies accelerate," said John Nielsen, an energy analyst with the nonprofit environmental group Western Resource Advocates. "There was slow progress over the last decade, and you're now seeing this tipping point."

Among the signs is the arrival of Vestas, a Danish wind turbine company, which announced Friday the construction of two more manufacturing plants and 1,350 new jobs, bringing the company's total in Colorado to 2,450. ConocoPhillips announced this year that it will locate its alternative-fuels research operation in the state. The Colorado-based National Renewable Energy Laboratory is adding 100 jobs.

Colorado's growing political and economic commitment to renewables is causing fear in the oil and gas industry, which is fighting to keep its tax breaks and its influence over state rulemaking.

"We're not feeling very cherished," said Collins, whose oil and gas association represents more than 30 companies. The group objects to an initiative on the ballot in November; it would eliminate the industry's 87.5 percent property tax exemption, estimated to cost the state treasury $230 million to $320 million a year.

If the ballot rule passes, the tax money will be channeled to renewable fuels, wildlife conservation and education. The industry also objects to proposed rules that would require greater public health and environmental protection in areas where drilling takes place.

"It could have been done in a different way, and things wouldn't have gotten so heated," Collins said.

Alice Madden, the Democratic majority leader in the Colorado House, looks at the oil and gas industry today and recalls Xcel before the passage of Amendment 37. She has little sympathy for Collins's arguments, especially at a time when oil and gas profits are soaring.

"It's Chicken Little all over again: 'The sky is going to fall,' " said Madden, who also chairs Western Progress, an advocacy group. "The oil and gas companies see the writing on the wall, the shift to renewables. They want to make as much money as they can, right now."

Looking ahead, supporters of alternative fuels are counting on securing some advantages their fossil-fuel predecessors have enjoyed. One request is the renewal of a federal tax credit set to expire this year. Another, Prager said, is "some clear rules on the national level, especially on climate policy."

With 34,000 active gas wells in Colorado and 28 new permits issued each day, there is no chance that the oil and gas industry will fade away soon. And, as powerfully as the wind blows and the sun shines, the transmission grid for renewable energy is limited and the strength of the current is unsure.

"Unlike a coal plant or a gas plant," Prager said, "you can't flip a switch and make the wind blow."
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Aug, 2008 04:42 am
@sumac,
And this is particularly for Danon, and anyone else interested in the Bushes and the Carlyl Group.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/17/AR2008081702020.html?wpisrc=newsletter
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Aug, 2008 10:05 am
@sumac,
Endangered Process

Editorial in today's Washington Post

Proposed rule changes to the Endangered Species Act could do lasting harm in the natural world.

Tuesday, August 19, 2008; A12

IN MAY, the Bush administration reluctantly listed the polar bear as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act. The facts left it with little choice: the bear's Arctic Sea ice habitat is melting because of global warming. But the administration wasn't happy, because the Endangered Species Act was never intended to be an instrument for coping with climate change. Our sympathy was limited, since President Bush spent his entire time in office resisting the adoption of laws that would have been better suited to combating greenhouse gas emissions. But we agreed that the Endangered Species Act was the wrong tool for the problem.

Now, however, in what is ostensibly an attempt to deal with this polar bear mismatch, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne has proposed a rules change that would undermine the law's fundamental work. Mr. Kempthorne suggests far-reaching changes to the consultation process between the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service and other agencies. The changes would render the process meaningless and put all protected species at risk. Currently, an agency building a highway has to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service to determine whether the project is "likely to adversely affect" a listed species. If a determination is made that such harm is likely, the service conducts a more rigorous review of the project and issues a detailed opinion on its effects. It is in this give-and-take between the various agencies and services that modifications are made that allow projects to go forward while minimizing the harm to animals and to trees and other plants.

Under Mr. Kempthorne's plan, agencies would be able to decide for themselves whether a project is likely to harm a species, and not just polar bears. If an agency decided to consult on the possible impact, the Fish and Wildlife Service would have 60 days (with the possibility of a 60-day extension) to issue an opinion. If it didn't meet that deadline, the other agency could end the consultation and proceed. The Fish and Wildlife Service already can't meet the deadlines established in the Endangered Species Act and is practically being run by judges and lawyers because of litigation stemming from blown deadlines. So we don't hold out much hope that Mr. Kempthorne's new deadlines would be met, either. The impact could be devastating.

The department contends that other government agencies have had years of experience with the law and know as much as the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service about how to protect listed species. This is doubtful. The services are there for a reason -- to safeguard threatened and endangered species and to act as a check against the ambitions of agencies that want to complete projects. The rigor that the current consultation process fosters would be lost.

A 30-day comment period on the new rules has begun. So, here's our comment: Reissue the proposed regulations with a specific, targeted policy on how greenhouse gas emissions should be taken into account on federal projects under the Endangered Species Act. Gutting the consultation process, with all the unintended consequences of such an action, could be avoided.
0 Replies
 
Stradee
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Aug, 2008 12:40 pm
Interesting articles, sue

gwb = whatta legacy...

A good research site
http://www.world.org/weo/energy


http://rainforest.care2.com/i?p=583091674






http://rainforest.care2.com/i?p=583091674
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Aug, 2008 02:42 pm
@Stradee,
This is so cool. An animated spot on the dog days of summer, featuring, guess what?, dogs. The theme = too hot.

ehBeth and Danon - lookee here.

http://scher.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/18/dog-days/
0 Replies
 
alex240101
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Aug, 2008 04:42 pm
@sumac,
Good article. Thank you. Clicked
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/10/2024 at 01:17:32